1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5649 of 2024 1 - Smt. Mamta Das W/o Shri Prafull Das Aged About 60 Years R/o Balrampur, Tahsil- Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Director Education Officer District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Block Education Officer Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Chhattisgarh High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, Raipur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner :- Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate For State :- Mr. S.S. Choubey, P.L. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 19.02.2025 VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 1. Heard Mr. Somkant Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S.S. Choubey, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. 2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby set- aside the impugned order dated 22.08.2024 (Annexure P/1) and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed this writ petition against the order dated 22.08.2024 (Annexure P/1) whereby the petitioner has been removed from her services who was working on the post of Assistant Teacher LB (according to the petitioner she is Head-Mistress) only on the ground that the caste certificate of the petitioner has been verified by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee has held that the petitioner does not belong to the “Rohidas’ caste which comes under the Scheduled Tribe category in the list of Scheduled Tribes of Chhattigarh at Serial No.14. As such, without holding any departmental enquiry, 3 the petitioner has been removed from the services on the basis of circular dated 24.07.2008. He submits that no such finding has been given by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and only on the basis of some enquiry stipulated vide Annexure R/2 dated 13.04.2023 which was conducted by the authorities i.e. Head Master, this removal order has been passed which is per se illegal. He submits that no such enquiry has been conducted by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and, as such, the order impugned is per se illegal and requires to be quashed by this Court. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that when the enqiury was conducted in which due opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner and in the said enquiry, it came out that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Rohidas’ caste, and as such, the removal order has rightly been passed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions put forth before me and have also gone through the documents appended to the writ petition. 6. When it was queried from State counsel that whether such finding has been arrived by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, it has been submitted by State counsel that no such certificate or enquiry has been conducted by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and only on the basis of enquiry report, which is said to have been conducted by High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner has been removed from her services. 4 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, especially considering the fact that the removal of the petitioner is on the ground that the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee has passed the order against the petitioner holding that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Rohidas’ caste whereas the fact is that no such enquiry was conducted by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and the finding to the respect that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Rohidas’ caste has never been passed by the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, this Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 22.08.2024 is illegal and arbitrary on the face of it and the concerned authorities have passed the order in a very high handedness, it is required to be quashed and is hereby quashed. The consequence of this order would be followed in respect of the service of the petitioner. 8. With the aforesaid direction/observation, this writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad ) Judge Vishakha